shelly_schedule_list

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds a genuinely non-obvious operational constraint (local-only, cloud cannot manage schedules), but says nothing about failure modes, auth, or pagination behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences, purpose first and constraint second, with no redundant restatement of the tool name. Every clause carries information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Return values are covered by the output schema and read-only semantics by annotations, so the core is present. The remaining gap is the identifier format for 'device', which an agent needs in order to actually invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the single required 'device' parameter is undocumented in both schema and description. The agent gets no hint whether device is an ID, name, IP, or index, so the description does not compensate for the coverage gap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource (list schedules) scoped to a device, which cleanly separates it from shelly_schedule_create/update/delete and from shelly_scene_list. It doesn't explicitly name a sibling, so it stops short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The parenthetical 'Local-only (cloud can't manage schedules)' tells the agent when the call is even possible, which is real usage context. However, it gives no guidance on choosing this over related tools (e.g., get_status or scene_list) and no prerequisites for the device argument.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.